Response to Post 7
Yes, sellers may have a moral obligation, but so do buyers. However if you want to take the moral high ground, that is an expectation that the seller, though not legally obliged to do so, decide to underwrite the risk after the item has been handed to the carrier, then you must accept that the seller has the right to expect for the buyer to repaid them in kind by minimising the risk; but if what regularly appears on these boards anything to go by, most appear to be of the view that when it comes questions of ethics, it a one way street.
So here is my refund policy if an item is not received or damaged and sent regular post. Please feel free to enter into a debate if you believe the ethics on which that policy is based, is somehow found wanting.
I allow the buyer to pick up the item, and if the item is picked up all postage and handling charges are waived. That is Iโm selling a product not postage.
All my items sent regular post have โDo Not Safe Dropโ (DNSD) stickers attached, because they provide the same level of protection and evidentiary outcome for items costing less than $50 as if it had been sent registered post.
Now, the buyer is advised of the DNSD requirement in the listing, and yes, you guessed it, some object to them being used, because of the inconvenience. That is โIโm at work all day, and the last thing I need is take the time to go to the post office and collect itโ.
Therefore my policy is, in all cases where the buyer refuses to allow the item to covered by a DNSD sticker, should the item not be received, I will lodge a claim with Aust Post, and if the outcome is, the claim is rejected on the grounds that the item is recorded as delivered, then itโs a case of โSorry, you decided to have it safe dropped, therefore the problems yoursโ, and if that results in negative feedback Iโll get it removed on the grounds that, what they are really complaining about is their own laziness and poor judgement.
On the other hand if a DNSD sticker is attached, then Iโll get the buyer to provide me with a Stat Dec stating it hasnโt been received, and once provided, I will reimburse the buyer the full cost (including postage) and take up the matter under the Aust Post Discretionary Claims process and if necessary the Postal Ombudsman.
So why the difference between the two. In the first instance the buyer made a decision to place the item at risk by demanding it be safe dropped, and I will hold them accountable for that decision. That is because it was safe dropped I canโt prove it was delivered to the wrong address, therefore any claim I ,make will fail.
On the other hand, if they allow a DNSD sticker to be used, this, coupled with Stat Dec, is sufficient proof to establish the most likely reason why the item was not received was because of Aust Post negligence, and as such any claim I make, will in all probability succeed. That is because, as the DNSD policy preludes the item from being safe dropped, if the buyer say they didnโt receive it, but the Aust Post data says it was delivered, then there are only two plausible reasons why it wasnโt received. It was either delivered to the wrong address or it was delivered to the correct address, and contrary to instructions, safe dropped, after which it was stolen, both of which fall within the definition of lost due to the negligence by the carrier.
As for items damaged in transit, I clearly remember one incident here where one of the regulars told a seller, if the item is damaged in transit, there is no onus on the buyer to assist you by returning the damaged item and the packaging to Aust Post.
Well my position is, if it damaged I ask the buyer to do exactly that, and if they do, and Aust Post reject the claim on the basis of inadequate packaging, I ask the buyer to put it all in a box (the item and packaging) and amil it back to me, and when received, I will reimburse the total costs (item cost plus both postage components). I will then take the matter up with Aust Post. Needless to say, if Aust Post accept the claim, problem solved.
On the other hand if the buyer takes the extraordinary advice previously given, then my attitude is, the problem is yours and yours alone.
My point is simple, buyers can only expect for sellers to do the โrightโ thing, if they are prepared to do the same, and if they are not, then they have only themselves to blame when something goes wrong, and they find themselves out of pocket.
